Finland euro cents

Hi, just a simple question.

why the 1, 2 and 5 euro cents from finland are catalogued on numista divided by 1st type and 2nd type even if they have the same KM number? Which is the difference between 1st and 2nd type? Why in the case of the other countries there is no difference between the types before and after 2007?

thanks,

Francesco

 I think - perhaps - there was a redesign of the map.

this could be right for the 10, 20, 50 euro cents and the 1 and 2 euros... but on the 1, 2, 5 cents coins there is no map...

  I see what you mean now. I was wondering then if it was to do with the Euro Zone expanding.
Maybe not though; but the link below explains, hopefully ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_euro_coins

I show the two pictures below (reverse of Finland 2 Euro Cent) - the original ones (size not changed) off the Numista pages. The first coin (2000) is before 2007 change. The second coin (2008) is afterwards. From reading the above link, I see the addition of FI (for Finland) on the lower right of the sword blade.

Hello,

I was wondering the same question. Is that little difference enough so the coins would be separated in two types? There are coins with bigger differences still considered as one type.

The "FI" is only a mint mark and all the coins have the same KM# reference, so indeed, it's not logical to separate these in two types.

KM is not a bible or any other holy book. If referee knows that Krause is wrong, or could be better, there is no point sticking to Krause.

Arguments like: "Everyone has Krause, let's be the same!" "Everyone collects by KM, and this is obstructing!" are senseless. Catalogue should be as perfect as it can, without making it simple because somebody else failed to spot a mistake or difference before.

That was just a general talk. If difference is only mintmark, it usually stays on one page.

Hi,

here is a documentation I made years back..... the same goes for the 1 and 5 euro-cent coins.



Ole

In 2006 or so, the European Central Bank decreed that all euro coins shall carry an indication of the issuing country on the national side. Appropriate were considered the full country name in a national language, a commonly used abbreviation (e.g. RF and RI for France and Italy, respectively) or just the national flag (Austria).

For this reason, Finland added FI to the coins from 2007 onwards and Belgium added BE from 2008 onwards.
Germany and Greece withstood the decree and their common euro coins still do not carry an indication of the country name (their commemoratives do carry a capital D for Deutschland, or the full country name)

Against this background, I think it is justified to consider Finnish euro coins with or without FI as different types.

Quote: "Sjoelund"​Hi,
​
​here is a documentation I made years back..... the same goes for the 1 and 5 euro-cent coins.
​
​
​
​Ole

​In 2007 there is also a mintmark on the coin, only located to the left of the date. The "#99.3" continues to be used until today (2017 set).

I also think it would be the right decission to only have one page each for 1, 2 and 5 Cents from Finland.

The difference from 2007-2024 to 1999-2006 is very little, it's just a few different and rearanged mintmarks.

 

I like the posted picture that shows these changes, but based on it, you could also argue that 2008-2010 and 2011 should get their own page.

 

I think overall the coin design didn't really change.

 

Yes, Finland uses the new map from 2007 onwards, but as already said, this only affects the 10 Cent - 2€ coins.

All other euro countries also changed their maps in 2007 or 2008 and they only have new catalogue entries for 10 Cent - 2€.

The FI addition to Finnish 1, 2 & 5 cent coins from 2007 is more a country identifier than a Mintmark. 

 

Although it may be called a Mintmark by some people and on the actual coin page on Numista it is shown as being a Mintmark.

 

Why Krause didn't bother to change the KM# is anyones guess? They probably wern't told about the very minor change?

 

Mike

meanwhile in Panama

Same N# but different writing, different design, even number of stars are different.

brismike

 

Why Krause didn't bother to change the KM# is anyones guess? They probably wern't told about the very minor change?

 

Schön also.

For me is one single type. FI (for Finland, not mintmark) and mintmark instead M (Raimo Makkonen, Mint Master, Mint of Finland) is not enough to change type. Only my opinion.

We have two infamous examples of km numbers per mint mark. Namely France. Germany don't have different km numbers per mint mark.

SCWC admittedly made a mess out of its mint mark policy?

Both methods can be defended.

 For Finland I also would go for the united system.